Whitney v. Lowell

Decided July 1, 1851

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1851-07-01

Exceptions from the District Court, Hathaway, J. Trover for a mare. The plaintiff claims under a mortgage made to him by one Garland to secure a note payable Dec. 1, 1847, which is yet unpaid. The mare was left in possession of Garland, and there was evidence, tending to show that by agreement Garland was to keep the possession until the pay-day of the note should arrive.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1851-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 1923

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wells, J., orally.

¶1The instrument was a mortgage in the regular and usual form. Parol evidence was offered, to show that it was designed to be merely a pledge, and thereby control the written contract. Such evidence was clearly inadmissible.

¶2The unconditional sale by Garland, though prior to the payday of the note, was a violation of the trust reposed in him *320by the plaintiff ; and gave to the plaintiff an instant right to reclaim the possession.

¶3The instruction was that the sale or offer to sell by the defendant was evidence of a conversion. That fact when taken in connection with the proof of the demand and the nondelivery, constituted sufficient evidence of a conversion.

¶4Exceptions overruled.